"Saving for retirement is pointless thanks to the impending "supersonic tsunami" of AI and robotics, which will bring about a world of zero scarcity, according to Elon Musk. While the Tesla and SpaceX CEO admitted he's "more optimistic" than most, he insisted people shouldn't stress over building a nest egg for the distant future, contrary to the staid advice of nearly all other financial professionals."
"By 2030, AI will surpass "the intelligence of all humans combined," Musk predicted. He also claimed eventually there will be more humanoid robots than humans on Earth. Slowly, the traditional job will be replaced as well, with white collar positions first on the list. "Anything short of shaping atoms, AI can do probably half or more of those jobs right now," he said. The advances could lead to such big productivity increases, he said, that they will surpass "what people possibly could think of as abundance.""
"Rather than a universal income, everyone will enjoy a "universal 'you can have whatever you want' income" in the future, he claimed. In this world, the link between individual wages, savings, and living standards no longer makes sense. Even without savings, AI will help people obtain better medical care than currently available within five years, as well as remove any limit on the availability of goods, services, or educational opportunities."
Rapid advances in AI, robotics, and energy technology are predicted to dramatically increase productivity and abundance, potentially eliminating scarcity. AI could exceed the combined intelligence of all humans by 2030 and lead to more humanoid robots than humans, with white-collar jobs replaced first. The direct link between wages, savings, and living standards may dissolve as automated production and services remove limits on goods, education, and medical care. A form of universal, unlimited income could emerge, making traditional retirement savings unnecessary. Improved AI healthcare and pervasive automation are expected to improve access to services within years rather than decades.
Read at Fortune
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]